Really enjoying your video. Grateful to you.

It is such a great and comprehensive tutorial regarding OHT composite testing. I do appreciate your work and it really helped me.

@FEADith

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you! glad it was helpful

Very informative video. 👍

saved by life :)

Thanks for tutorial. And I’m wondering if you could provide the article for this work, please. Thanks in advance.

Are you sure the thickness is correct since it is relative thickness not thickness itself?

@FEADith

3 жыл бұрын

Element Relative Thickness The relative thickness of the layer. Abaqus determines the overall section thickness from the element geometry, and the thickness may vary through the model for a given section definition. Hence, the thickness values that you specify are only relative thicknesses for each layer. The actual thickness of a layer is the element thickness times the fraction of the total thickness that is accounted for by each layer. You do not have to use physical units to specify the thickness ratios for the layers, and the sum of the layer relative thicknesses does not have to add to one.

ane sudah sepsekerep Gan

Thanks for the toutrial! I am wondering what should we do about stacking direction when we define a local csys for our layup? On this situation, which direction is the correct direction for stacking?

@FEADith

2 жыл бұрын

stacking direction is a way to tell abaqus about the directionality of an element local material orientation is to tell abaqus about material principal direction. they are 2 different things..

@samanehtashi7482

2 жыл бұрын

@@FEADith Thanks for your reply Actually I modeled an assembly of composite parts including continuum shell and solid elements And give the materials orientations by local coordinate systems My model is extruded in a size of an element I tried different stacking direction and cannot get the correct result I am pretty sure the problem comes from stacking direction of element and have tried different elm directions but it has not worked out Any thoughts is appreciate

hi, thanks for this tutorial .......can you send me the paper containing the property you have used here

Nice vedio, do you know where to find continuum shell element SC8RT for coupled temperature-displacement analysis? I used continuum shell to define the layup of lamiante and created a coupled temperature-displacement step, somehow I can only use continuum shell SC8R when choosing element type.

@FEADith

3 жыл бұрын

Try to used couple temperature displacement step in step module.. your element of choice then should appears

can you modèle de laminate by doing every pli alone then assemble them with cohesif elements ?

@FEADith

4 жыл бұрын

Yes you can. You can make part for each ply and for each cohesive layer. Then assemble them and assign tie constrain between the cohesive layer and the surrounding plies. It should do the job.

Thank you sir. I just confused. The material is brittle. We normally say that brittle materials are stronger in compression than tension. However, the number is vice versa. Please explain it

@FEADith

3 жыл бұрын

good question turan,, yes you are right... for normal isotropic material, usually the compression strength is higher than the tensile strength, especially for brittle isotropic material. why? because in compression you tend to close the crack, while in tension you tend to initiate cracks and once the crack appears.. rapid crack propagation appears. However, in continuous fiber composites, the behavior is anisotropic, dan the strength is dominated by the slender fibers bonded by the matrix (which is very weak compared to fibers). So when composites are compressed along the fiber direction, the fibers tend to easily buckle... so easy that it requires lower stress compared to the stress required to break the fibers under tensile... yes.. that is why. (the slenderness and weak matrix bonding really make the difference)

sir please mention the reference paper for this example. thanks

hello sir. I request could you please share the Research Paper that you have referred.

@FEADith

2 жыл бұрын

Check the description 2016 paper

I am not sure whether having two elements through the thickness is correct given that you have selected the whole model and defined the lay-ups. Here is the information from the manual "Continuum shell composite layups are expected to have a single element through their thickness, and that single element contains multiple plies that are defined in the ply table. If the region to which you assign your continuum shell composite layup contains multiple elements, each element will contain the plies defined in the ply table, and the analysis results will not be as expected."

Subscription "9gag" :(